Bruce Jenner unlikely to be charged in fatal car accident.

[pnwmom]

He was following too closely -- which is against the law though almost everyone on that highway does it -- but following the speed limit.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/bruce-jenner-dodge-manslaughter-charge-crash-article-1.2171873

Bruce Jenner was within legal hauling weight during his fatal car accident in Malibu in February — making a misdemeanor manslaughter charge even less likely than before, a law enforcement source told the Daily News Thursday.

The former Olympian's Cadillac Escalade showed no problems with its brakes or steering during a review by California Highway Patrol investigators, and the trailer and off-road vehicle he was hauling were weighed and found to be well below the maximum allowed, the source said.

Jenner's phone records also confirmed what his lawyer previously said — that the star of "Keeping Up with the Kardashians" was not texting at the time of the tragic crash.

SNIP

Jenner, 65, passed a field sobriety test at the scene and had no alcohol in his system, police sources previously confirmed.

SNIP

Howe, a devoted patron of animal charities, had no children and no immediate relatives, so an attorney has been handling her sizable estate, sources told The News.

[darkangel218]

1. Rich assholes never do.

Don't tell me you're surprised.

[pnwmom]

3. Most people who aren't DUI, texting, or speeding aren't charged criminally

for car accidents, no matter how much money they have.

[darkangel218]

4. Well, thats too bad.

Texting and speeding kills. Same as alcohol, if not more.

[pnwmom]

5. I think you misunderstood. Texting and speeding are both grounds for criminal charges

when there is an injury or death.

But Jenner did neither.

[darkangel218]

7. From what i understood he followed too closely.

[pnwmom]

9. Yes. And on a road where everyone is following too closely that can be hard not to do.

Because if you leave enough space between your car and another vehicle, some other car will see the gap, pass you, and fill it in.

That happens to me all the time around here, and in CA it's even more common for most drivers to follow too closely. That's why you hear about 12 car pileups.

[darkangel218]

14. No one has to follow anyone "too closely".

That's BS. He did it voluntarily.

[pnwmom]

15. I just explained how it happens -- frequently.

I'll be following someone at a safe distance, and someone immediately moves over to fill the "gap."

[Logical]

12. Ahh, Grumpy? Bruce make you mad at some point? nt

[Romeo.lima333]

2. as if this was some kind of excuse

which is against the law though almost everyone on that highway does it

[pnwmom]

6. On highways where everyone is following too closely it is hard to avoid it.

Why? Because when you try to leave adequate space between your car and the car ahead of you, someone else passes you and quickly fills that space in.

That's one reason I hate driving on freeways around here. I am very aware of the safe distance you're supposed to leave between cars, but it's hard to maintain it when other people keep filling in any perceived gaps.

[Romeo.lima333]

13. yea, i know what youre saying, it happens to me too

but when someone merges in front of you you briefly brake give yourself ample room, when someone else merges in you do it again. it's still no excuse

[pnwmom]

16. You're right -- it's not an excuse for liability, so you could lose a civil case,

and you (or your insurance company) could have to pay a lot of money.

But criminal charges are rarely involved in cases like this.

[Politicalboi]

8. I still think he was distracted

And he may have more than one phone not listed under his name.

<a href="http://imgur.com/oBw1Z3i"><img src="" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>

The look of fear on the woman's face, and Bruce looks like he didn't realize he hit someone. Kind of looks like he has something in his left hand that he's looking at

[pnwmom]

10. That's what civil lawsuits are for. Criminal law only applies to certain types

of distractions. For example, a person can be criminally charged for texting while driving in CA. But there aren't criminal charges if someone is fiddling with the radio, eating a sandwich, or distracted by a baby in the backseat.

These kind of distractions happen all the time, and they're dealt with in civil lawsuits. That's why people carry liability insurance -- to cover those kind of situations where they are at fault.

A second phone? Well, people can speculate but the police were there and they didn't find a second phone.

[shraby]

11. Thinking and knowing are worlds apart.